Manchester City

[Rc2702]

Just now, alfieconn said:

But a 200m pounds fine would eat up their profits for 20 years ????

City need to come clean about this it looks awful but it just fuels that idea that the wins are just not as sweet as teams that claw there way to it. Fifa manager game is fairer than the real thing. No probs with Arab or Russian investment but within the means or its another thing entirely - cheating.

[champers]

1 hour ago, Bredbury Blue said:

This is is a football forum to discuss football related matters not to promote other agendas.  So how about everybody tries to moderate this forum and we keep out the unwelcome politics, racism, etc, whether that's the recent goings on in the Uk Alfie has mentioned (i prefer not to give a mention), calling jewish or arabs, or the politics of UAE - unwelcome.

Frankly im sick of the anti-arab (rights abuse in UAE) comments aimed at Citys owner and intended to flame City fans. I will in future be reporting them and requesting their removal. I have no problem though with comments about our ownership, our finances, etc.

Just so you know !

 

Fair point, but to think that conflicts amongst Middle Eastern countries have no impact on the game is naive. For me, the prime example is those countries lined up against Qatar (PSG), chiefly being the UAE (Man City and Arsenal).

Examples would be PSG gazummping City for Dani Alves and the steady flow of Arsenal players to City a few years ago. City probably paid more towards Arsenal's new stadium than Arsenal.

[smokie36]

"We will not be providing any comment on out of context materials purportedly hacked or stolen from City Football Group and Manchester City personnel and associated people," the club said. "The attempt to damage the club's reputation is organised and clear."

 

From Man City that....seems to me the attempt to find the truth is far clearer than any to damage reputations.

[BangrakBob]

Just to be clear I've never once mentioned anything regarding the ruling family of the UAE, or anything associated with them politically or in business. I've only ever discussed the ownership of Manchester City and the associated wealth of the club.

 

This is a serious post, as I live in the Middle East and am relocating back to the UAE shortly. 

Edited November 3, 2018 by BangrakBob

[mrbojangles]

9 hours ago, RonniePickering22 said:

"We will not be providing any comment on out of context materials purportedly hacked or stolen from City Football Group and Manchester City personnel and associated people," the club said. "The attempt to damage the club's reputation is organised and clear."

 

From Man City that....seems to me the attempt to find the truth is far clearer than any to damage reputations.

And....a quote from skynews:-

 

Quote

Sky Sports News has attempted to contact a number of other Premier League clubs named in the revelations for comment, and has been issued a response from FIFA in which the governing body also suggests that documents may have been "illegally obtained".

 

[smokie36]

2 hours ago, mrbojangles said:

And....a quote from skynews:-

 

 

 

Obtained nonetheless mrboj.

 

Is it true or not is the question which needs answering.

 

LOL we all know the truth of that.

[mrbojangles]

59 minutes ago, RonniePickering22 said:

 

Obtained nonetheless mrboj.

 

Is it true or not is the question which needs answering.

 

LOL we all know the truth of that.

All lies to tarnish our good name

[smokie36]

3 minutes ago, mrbojangles said:

All lies to tarnish our good name

 

I don't really care as I hate the whole idea of FFP.

 

Funny though.

[carmine]

16 hours ago, RonniePickering22 said:

 

And who is going to hand out these fines and admit wrongdoing?

Well i doubt Infantino is going to fall on his sword.  And who would doubt arab bribe money is being discussed already, plus all ways and means to cover up and carry on.  I trust no ones going to be coming on here telling i'm jealous and talking rubbish.  Its plain to see what these middle eastern owners are all about.  They are a tumor in the sport that needs cutting out, as is Infantino.

[Bredbury Blue]

So the french and FIFA have issued statements not confirming wrong doing. City have taken the correct approach of we won't be commenting on a newspaper report - why should we.

[mrbojangles]

Some people fall for fake news because it's what they've been wanting to hear and feeds their agenda.

 

For the record. We all knew on here that a deal had been done at the time, as we were going to sue UEFA if they kicked us out of the CL. Their punishment was based on assumptions by PWC. It was posted in here (go search) and the deal was not to challenge the decision or UEFA said the penalty could increase. So we accepted the fine which was later reduced as we adhered to the rules.

[smokie36]

5 minutes ago, mrbojangles said:

Some people fall for fake news because it's what they've been wanting to hear and feeds their agenda.

 

For the record. We all knew on here that a deal had been done at the time, as we were going to sue UEFA if they kicked us out of the CL. Their punishment was based on assumptions by PWC. It was posted in here (go search) and the deal was not to challenge the decision or UEFA said the penalty could increase. So we accepted the fine which was later reduced as we adhered to the rules.

 

The revelations have nothing to do with that.

 

Its all about appropriate levels of sponsorship and all of the experts agreed yours was silly yet nothing was done about it.

 

Funny that isn't it? You don't need to be an expert to see your sponsorship deals over the years are rather errrrm one sided.

[Rc2702]

No smoke without fire and the truth will come out. Whether it's a paper trail to a bank or more hacked info it is clear from the size of the sponsorships that something stinks. It's not as bad as juventus match fixing but it's close.

[smokie36]

9 minutes ago, Rc2702 said:

No smoke without fire and the truth will come out. Whether it's a paper trail to a bank or more hacked info it is clear from the size of the sponsorships that something stinks. It's not as bad as juventus match fixing but it's close.

 

Well the only way for City to have caught up with the big clubs was to inject huge sums of money....its not really a surprise to any of us.

[Rc2702]

Just now, RonniePickering22 said:

 

Well the only way for City to have caught up with the big clubs was to inject huge sums of money....its not really a surprise to any of us.

The smoking gun though is why infantino bent over for both clubs and ignored the professional opinions of those companies that UEFA employed to perform the duedil. 

[mrbojangles]

33 minutes ago, RonniePickering22 said:

 

The revelations have nothing to do with that.

 

Its all about appropriate levels of sponsorship and all of the experts agreed yours was silly yet nothing was done about it.

 

Funny that isn't it? You don't need to be an expert to see your sponsorship deals over the years are rather errrrm one sided.

We don't even have the biggest sponsorship deal.

 

Just explain this to me. How does a team who haven't won anything in donkey's years (Spurs) get more sponsorship money than us? Something dodgy there me thinks. United, Arsenal, Liverpool, Spurs all have better deals than us.

 

But that obviously doesn't suit this witch hunt

 

https://www.90min.com/posts/6101720-revealed-the-10-clubs-who-earn-the-most-from-shirt-stadium-sponsorship-each-year

 

[mrbojangles]

1 minute ago, Rc2702 said:

The smoking gun though is why infantino bent over for both clubs and ignored the professional opinions of those companies that UEFA employed to perform the duedil. 

Because we threatened them with legal action. If they had of been absolutely 100% sure that we were guilty of any wrong doing they would have said bring it on

[mrbojangles]

On ‎5‎/‎17‎/‎2014 at 10:18 AM, mrbojangles said:

This is what has reportedly been handed out:-

After weeks of hard bargaining, UEFA finally announced their sanctions on City which include:

*A limit of £49m on new signings this summer, only increased by money they receive from selling players.

*Their wage bill for the next two seasons must stay the same as this season.

*A fine of nearly £50million – £32m of which will be returned to City if the break even over the next two years.

*They can only name a 21-man squad for the Champions League next season, instead of the normal 25, with eight of the players being “home-grown”.

*City can only lose £17m next season and just £8.5m the following year.

Here you go. In 2014 this is what I posted. It was clear then that what had happened, as it was reported that  "after weeks of hard bargaining"

[Rc2702]

Just now, mrbojangles said:

Because we threatened them with legal action. If they had of been absolutely 100% sure that we were guilty of any wrong doing they would have said bring it on

Believe I read that someone at one of the clubs said " I'd rather pay lawyers 30m and fight for years" along those lines. FIFA basically let two states run 2 football clubs and bit off much more than they could chew. 

[Bredbury Blue]

RONNIE: Its all about appropriate levels of sponsorship and all of the experts agreed yours was silly yet nothing was done about it.

Yes something was done about it: we were fined and had our squad reduced.

[smokie36]

We'll just have to watch and wait as more of this story tumbles out....all highly amusing to me.

 

A secret Bahamas bank account for Infantino perhaps....? 

[Bredbury Blue]

RONNIE:Well the only way for City to have caught up with the big clubs was to inject huge sums of money....its not really a surprise to any of us.

Have you been living under a rock for the past decade. We were bought..money was invested..we bought heavily to catch up. We've caught up.

[smokie36]

1 minute ago, Bredbury Blue said:

RONNIE:Well the only way for City to have caught up with the big clubs was to inject huge sums of money....its not really a surprise to any of us.

Have you been living under a rock for the past decade. We were bought..money was invested..we bought heavily to catch up. We've caught up.

 

Stick to the facts of the matter instead of trying your deflection tactics.

 

The experts said what your sponsorship deals contained was ridiculous....yet Infantino did NOTHING about it.

 

Stinky....very stinky indeed.

[Bredbury Blue]

R2D2: Believe I read that someone at one of the clubs said " I'd rather pay lawyers 30m and fight for years" along those lines. 

Its being reported that our chairman said. If he said that what would that imply? Most probably it implies he didn't agree therefore there was hard bargaining until he did agree and we settled for the punishment imposed. Sounds like a typical day in my office to me..negotiating, bargaining, etc.

[Bredbury Blue]

It's also worth remembering that these new regulations called Financial Fair Play FFP were challenged in the european courts by the Bosman Ruling lawyer Dupont. Eufa consequently 'relaxed' their regulations, aimed at curbing the nouvelle riche clubs like PSG Chelsea City and others on behalf of the established clubs.

Jean-Louis Dupont reacts to UEFA’s changes to FFPHere’s a statement from Jean-Louis Dupont following UEFA’s changes to FFP:

“Our clients (Mr. Daniel Striani, Manchester Football Club Supporters Club and supporters of Paris St Germain) have been informed of the amendments to the Financial Fair Play (FFP) regulations adopted yesterday by UEFA. 

First, they find the crucial measure taken, namely to allow a degree of over-spending (as long as this over-spending is guaranteed by shareholders of the club), to be precisely one of the measures they had requested before the courts.  Before the judges, UEFA nevertheless argued during 2 years that such an alternative was totally incompatible with the objectives of FFP. Good to know that UEFA has finally updated its software…

UEFA says that with these amendments, FFP is evolving from a “period of austerity to a sustainable growth period.” In more direct terms,  UEFA is simply moving from an entirely illegal rule to a rule that becomes a little bit less illegal.

Indeed, in competition law, any excessive restriction of the freedom of enterprise is by definition illegal. With these amendments yesterday, UEFA is therefore fully confessing that the previous version of the rule was excessive and therefore illegal under competition law.

The questions referred by the Court of First Instance in Brussels to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) have now been registered with the European Supreme Court under the case number C-299/15.  

UEFA has appealed to the Brussels Court of Appeal of the decision of the trial judge, while stating publicly that it is fully convinced that the ECJ will confirm the legality of the regulation. If this is the case, one wonders why the UEFA makes every effort to try to delay this necessary “European game”?  Why is it “playing the clock”? And why is it so desperate to avoid playing that game on its natural pitch, i.e. before the ECJ?  To ask the question is, in effect, to answer it.

The questions currently before the ECJ are clearly more relevant than ever since, on the one hand, the ECJ will judge the legality of the rules that UEFA has applied to all European clubs for several years (until today) and, on the other hand, it will – by contrast – assess the legality of the new version of the regulation.

Finally, we are particularly puzzled about the fact that, according to UEFA. some clubs (those already sanctioned or under agreement procedure) will not immediately benefit from the adopted amendments. At first sight, this is absolutely discriminatory.  Our clients reserve the right to inject this issue into the proceedings.”

– Jean-Louis Dupont, Martin Hissel
 

Edited November 4, 2018 by Bredbury Blue

[mrbojangles]

14 minutes ago, RonniePickering22 said:

 

Stick to the facts of the matter instead of trying your deflection tactics.

 

The experts said what your sponsorship deals contained was ridiculous....yet Infantino did NOTHING about it.

 

Stinky....very stinky indeed.

Our sponsors get something in return i.e. they are sponsoring a club that is winning things. What do Spurs sponsors get? And yet they pay more to sponsor you. Extremely stinky

[smokie36]

3 minutes ago, mrbojangles said:

Our sponsors get something in return i.e. they are sponsoring a club that is winning things. What do Spurs sponsors get? And yet they pay more to sponsor you. Extremely stinky

 

Tsk tsk you nouveau riche lot need to understand what a big club is. 

[mrbojangles]

4 minutes ago, Bredbury Blue said:

It's also worth remembering that these new regulations called Financial Fair Play FFP were challenged in the european courts by the Bosman Ruling lawyer Dupont. Eufa consequently 'relaxed' their regulations, aimed at curbing the nouvelle riche clubs like PSG Chelsea City and others on behalf of the established clubs.

Jean-Louis Dupont reacts to UEFA’s changes to FFPHere’s a statement from Jean-Louis Dupont following UEFA’s changes to FFP:

“Our clients (Mr. Daniel Striani, Manchester Football Club Supporters Club and supporters of Paris St Germain) have been informed of the amendments to the Financial Fair Play (FFP) regulations adopted yesterday by UEFA. 

First, they find the crucial measure taken, namely to allow a degree of over-spending (as long as this over-spending is guaranteed by shareholders of the club), to be precisely one of the measures they had requested before the courts.  Before the judges, UEFA nevertheless argued during 2 years that such an alternative was totally incompatible with the objectives of FFP. Good to know that UEFA has finally updated its software…

UEFA says that with these amendments, FFP is evolving from a “period of austerity to a sustainable growth period.” In more direct terms,  UEFA is simply moving from an entirely illegal rule to a rule that becomes a little bit less illegal.

Indeed, in competition law, any excessive restriction of the freedom of enterprise is by definition illegal. With these amendments yesterday, UEFA is therefore fully confessing that the previous version of the rule was excessive and therefore illegal under competition law.

The questions referred by the Court of First Instance in Brussels to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) have now been registered with the European Supreme Court under the case number C-299/15.  

UEFA has appealed to the Brussels Court of Appeal of the decision of the trial judge, while stating publicly that it is fully convinced that the ECJ will confirm the legality of the regulation. If this is the case, one wonders why the UEFA makes every effort to try to delay this necessary “European game”?  Why is it “playing the clock”? And why is it so desperate to avoid playing that game on its natural pitch, i.e. before the ECJ?  To ask the question is, in effect, to answer it.

The questions currently before the ECJ are clearly more relevant than ever since, on the one hand, the ECJ will judge the legality of the rules that UEFA has applied to all European clubs for several years (until today) and, on the other hand, it will – by contrast – assess the legality of the new version of the regulation.

Finally, we are particularly puzzled about the fact that, according to UEFA. some clubs (those already sanctioned or under agreement procedure) will not immediately benefit from the adopted amendments. At first sight, this is absolutely discriminatory.  Our clients reserve the right to inject this issue into the proceedings.”

– Jean-Louis Dupont, Martin Hissel
 

Now you've ruined it BB. The fact that we are accused of being illegal to a rule which itself is illegal and which is why we were going to sue in the first place, will not make those on here with their agenda's very happy.

 

They are very quick to come on here spouting rumours and allegations but I wonder what rubbish will be spouted in response to the facts above. If any do respond!!

[smokie36]

Haha I have no agenda here.

 

This whole sorry business began because the new rich clubs weren't giving large sums to those in power in the game so they brought in FFP to grab some of that cash.

 

Everyone knew it was a game designed for that purpose and the rules would be bent and twisted to suit.

 

I'm just waiting to see just how dirty and mucky Infantino really is.

 

Football club owners doing deals in motorway service stations....this is just the next logical step really and no surprise.....and I'm not pointing particularly at City in saying that....corruption in the game has always been around.

[Rc2702]

I hope ings has not forgotten about his bet with salah and he gets a couple today and Hughes topples his old club. We can dream and sometimes it can happen.